16 Days in January—Determining Trade Deadline Activity

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,964
What contenders that could use Smart & Schröder have enough value to trade for a star level player? And if they did, why not just acquire that guy themselves? Now if Beal or someone else demanded a trade to Boston, sure. But given their play this season it’s no longer a reasonable scenario. So the Marcus sucks!!! Trade him for a star!!! scenarios remain unrealistic.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
5,743
What contenders that could use Smart & Schröder have enough value to trade for a star level player? And if they did, why not just acquire that guy themselves?
I think the idea would be to trade Smart for some assets, combine what you get back with other assets, and then you trade the whole package for a star.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,964
I think the idea would be to trade Smart for some assets, combine what you get back with other assets, and then you trade the whole package for a star.
Again, look at the rosters of contenders and see what they have to give you back to match up with that. Unless a star is demanding a trade here the scenarios are far less realistic than Danny’s visions of trading for Anthony Davis and teaming him with the Demon Kyzuzu. Boston’s window opens up in the summer, if they miss the postseason and end up with a decent lottery pick.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
2,725
Every year there’s tons of talk around the deadline and then usually very little happens. It’s hard to pull off big deals mid-season. Stapling a pick to Juancho and getting some salary relief seems like a given, not sure I’d expect much else.
 

ColonelMustard

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2006
192
Thanks for sharing that. KSmith and @nighthob are gut-wrenchingly pointing out that there are few moves the Celtics can make. Everyone on this current roster has more value internally than externally.

We have to work towards the development of 1) Grant 2) Romeo 3) Nesmith and our 1st round pick to create value for that third star. The challenge for Ime is that he needs to win games simultaneously and develop Tatum and Brown. That is priority A.
Our veterans can execute the offensive and defensive sets to win games.

Grant is being put in a position to succeed and taking advantage of that opportunity to his credit. How can we get Romeo more involved? I'm really rooting for the dude and he appears to be of high character. He has athletic ability. Unfortunately, his injuries just have not given him the reps for consistency. The lack of confidence In Nesmith's body language is not something you want from a supposed sharpshooter. For fuck sake, you're an NBA baller, develop some mojo. Saddiq Bey is putting up volume stats in Detroit but he could be part of a deal for a blocked player that is blossoming.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
2,725
Grant’s averaging 3/2/1 this month. He’s improved from last year and he’s a contributor but is he really a long term building block? I remain unconvinced.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
507
What contenders that could use Smart & Schröder have enough value to trade for a star level player? And if they did, why not just acquire that guy themselves? Now if Beal or someone else demanded a trade to Boston, sure. But given their play this season it’s no longer a reasonable scenario. So the Marcus sucks!!! Trade him for a star!!! scenarios remain unrealistic.
Not a contender and not a star, but what about New Orleans and Graham. Griff would sell Smart as a culture setter, lock down defender and perfect fit next to Ingram, Point Zion and stretch Jonas.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
34,333
Melrose, MA
Grant’s averaging 3/2/1 this month. He’s improved from last year and he’s a contributor but is he really a long term building block? I remain unconvinced.
This is called "moving the goalposts."

Grant is a career 35% shooter from three despite a poor rookie year marked by missing his first 25 attempts. His 3 point shooting is trending upward: 25% to 37% to 42%. He's over 50% in a limited playoff sample.

His defense has stepped up considerably this year. Last year he was a bad tweener: too small to defend bigs, not quick enough to defend on the perimeter, but he has stepped up his perimeter defense considerably.

His floor is "good NBA role player who will have a long NBA career." I'm not sure what his ceiling is, but probably not too much higher than his floor.

Anyway, he's an asset. Whether he stays in Boston after the first contract will depend on how much of an asset other teams think he is vs Boston.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,455
Santa Monica
Grant’s averaging 3/2/1 this month. He’s improved from last year and he’s a contributor but is he really a long term building block? I remain unconvinced.
improving and contributing are good things

Grant continues to look like a young PJ Tucker. That's what his college coach, Rick Barnes, said when he was drafted and it's playing out like that, even down to the Corner3 prowess.

He's cheap, under control, spreads the floor, is switchable on D, and is not ball-dominant. That should play well with the JAYs + the ball-handler/PG of the future.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
2,105
Grant’s averaging 3/2/1 this month. He’s improved from last year and he’s a contributor but is he really a long term building block? I remain unconvinced.
I was a huge Grant hater last year but I have to stick up for him here.
As others have noted, he’s definitely not a building block but he’s very solid. He seems to know his role, doesn’t need the ball and can hit the corner 3. Most importantly, he’s earned the coach’s trust which is no small feat.

I think any chance of getting a “star” (or even another very good player) is dependent on that player wanting to come here and trading basically all of our draft capital. Maybe Schroeder can add some picks to the war chest but after that I don’t see much
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
2,725
I’m probably being too hard on Grant, but I’d like to see him be more assertive and aggressive. He’s 4-22 on threes over the last 7 games and I think it may be leading to him getting tentative and gun shy. His PER suggests a player who is still below average, offensively at least. He ranks 23rd in the league in TS% but 260th in PER. Shoot more!!!
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
I’m probably being too hard on Grant, but I’d like to see him be more assertive and aggressive. He’s 4-22 on threes over the last 7 games and I think it may be leading to him getting tentative and gun shy. His PER suggests a player who is still below average, offensively at least. He ranks 23rd in the league in TS% but 260th in PER. Shoot more!!!
You're not being too hard on him. He's a fringe rotation player and easily replaceable. He doesn't move the needle at all. He's a JAG. He's also incredibly inconsistent from game to game, he is too match up dependent.

Still better than Romeo and Nesmith. Our players on rookie contracts (outside of TL) are a hot mess and probably bottom 5 in the league.

edit: He's maybe PJ Tucker. Oh boy, PJ Tucker!
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
I’m probably being too hard on Grant, but I’d like to see him be more assertive and aggressive. He’s 4-22 on threes over the last 7 games and I think it may be leading to him getting tentative and gun shy. His PER suggests a player who is still below average, offensively at least. He ranks 23rd in the league in TS% but 260th in PER. Shoot more!!!
That’s human nature for a non-unconscious gunner. We saw the same once Romeo regressed from his 50% 3-pt as well which like Grant, didn’t appear to be sustainable to those extremes. It’s probably one of the reasons a guy like Jeff Green’s name is coming up. Btw, Green scored 19 on 9-11 shooting last night.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
507
You're not being too hard on him. He's a fringe rotation player and easily replaceable. He doesn't move the needle at all. He's a JAG. He's also incredibly inconsistent from game to game, he is too match up dependent.

Still better than Romeo and Nesmith. Our players on rookie contracts (outside of TL) are a hot mess and probably bottom 5 in the league.

edit: He's maybe PJ Tucker. Oh boy, PJ Tucker!
Provided he can keep the weight off and remain capable of defending wings, strong disagree. I see a solid rotation player, who if Brad can find a competent lead ball handler, fits perfectly alongside the Jays. A capable defender, a good screener, who is approaching 50/40/90 shooting splits and is apparently comfortable with that limited role is a useful contributor to winning basketball, especially while on a rookie deal.

I do agree he would have limited value to a rebuilding team.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Provided he can keep the weight off and remain capable of defending wings, strong disagree. I see a solid rotation player, who if Brad can find a competent lead ball handler, fits perfectly alongside the Jays. A capable defender, a good screener, who is approaching 50/40/90 shooting splits and is apparently comfortable with that limited role is a useful contributor to winning basketball, especially while on a rookie deal.

I do agree he would have limited value to a rebuilding team.
He's not approaching 50/40/90 though, he's declining from 50/40/90. He's now at .478/.416/.878 and trending in the wrong direction. If you think his true talent level really is 50/40/90, maybe. I do not. He's still regressing to the norm.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
507
Because our history with undersized guards has worked out so well?
East Conference Finals?

Plus he's not IT tiny, more like Pritchard or Quickley sized.

This team needs a PG who can shoot and penetrate. Guys who can do those two things and have the size to be a plus defender cost more than the assets Brad has available, unless 1) Brown is going out or 2) that guy is forcing his way to Boston.

I am not a Graham stan, but the pickings among PG's are slim right now.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
This team needs a PG who can shoot and penetrate.
Graham does those things, but he doesn't do either of them particularly well. Any type of shooting decline and you have the shooting equivalent of Smart without the rest of the package.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,829
I’m probably being too hard on Grant, but I’d like to see him be more assertive and aggressive. He’s 4-22 on threes over the last 7 games and I think it may be leading to him getting tentative and gun shy. His PER suggests a player who is still below average, offensively at least. He ranks 23rd in the league in TS% but 260th in PER. Shoot more!!!
An easy fix here is to ignore PER. Marcus Smart has never had a PER season as high as 14. Enes Freedom has never had a PER season below 14, and is usually in the 20s. It's useless.

You probably don't want Grant being more assertive either. He's shooting so well, partially anyway, because he takes good shots. If he shoots more often, he'd be mixing in less advantageous shots, then we'd be bitching he shoots too much.

You're not being too hard on him. He's a fringe rotation player and easily replaceable. He doesn't move the needle at all. He's a JAG. He's also incredibly inconsistent from game to game, he is too match up dependent.

Still better than Romeo and Nesmith. Our players on rookie contracts (outside of TL) are a hot mess and probably bottom 5 in the league.

edit: He's maybe PJ Tucker. Oh boy, PJ Tucker!
If you don't think getting a young PJ Tucker with the 22nd pick of the draft is a huge win, your sights are set way too high.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
If you don't think getting a young PJ Tucker with the 22nd pick of the draft is a huge win, your sights are set way too high.
Where did I say such things? We weren't discussing draft pick status, we were talking JAG status.

But keep putting words in my mouth. If you are all the excited about PJ Brown, your sights are way too low. Where he was picked is irrelevant.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,829
Where did I say such things? We weren't discussing draft pick status, we were talking JAG status.

But keep putting words in my mouth. If you are all the excited about PJ Brown, your sights are way too low. Where he was picked is irrelevant.
What did this mean then?

edit: He's maybe PJ Tucker. Oh boy, PJ Tucker!
This wasn't sarcastic? I don't think my filter is that far off

And of course where he was picked is relevant. You'd have a lot higher expectations for a guy picked 2nd instead of 22nd, no?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
This wasn't sarcastic? I don't think my filter is that far off

And of course where he was picked is relevant. You'd have a lot higher expectations for a guy picked 2nd instead of 22nd, no?
It was 100% sarcastic. PJ Brown is not a difference maker. Who cares if Grant Williams is PJ Brown?

And where he was picked does not matter. The picks were already made. We are judging the PLAYER NOT THE PICK. Someone can be a good pick for spot and still be a below average player or a bad player.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,519
around the way
I’m probably being too hard on Grant, but I’d like to see him be more assertive and aggressive. He’s 4-22 on threes over the last 7 games and I think it may be leading to him getting tentative and gun shy. His PER suggests a player who is still below average, offensively at least. He ranks 23rd in the league in TS% but 260th in PER. Shoot more!!!
Someone posted this already, but don't look at PER. In a world with imperfect basketball analytics, PER is among the worst and just about completely useless.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
I don't think he's awful by any means. He's a JAG. Nothing wrong with that, teams need a bunch of them.

He's not a long term building block though. If one isn't overly excited by Grant, they aren't being too hard on him. Grant isn't overly exciting.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,829
It was 100% sarcastic. PJ Brown is not a difference maker. Who cares if Grant Williams is PJ Brown?

And where he was picked does not matter. The picks were already made. We are judging the PLAYER NOT THE PICK. Someone can be a good pick for spot and still be a below average player or a bad player.
It's PJ Tucker, not PJ Brown.

And where he's picked, again, does matter. IF HE WAS PICKED SECOND YOU'D EXPECT A MUCH BETTER PLAYER THAN ONE PICKED TWENTY SECOND.

I can do CAPS too.

It's about resources used to acquire that player. If you picked a guy who's a decent bench player at #2, you screwed up. If you picked a guy who's a decent bench player at #22, you're a winner. How can that not matter?

Like, do salaries not matter to you either? If the Celtics sign a guy for 22 million and a guy for 2 million, do you expect the same level of player?
 

JM3

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
1,209
The one thing that PER is ok at is as a quick measure of an individual player's year against other years.

Grant definitely having his best season by far per advanced metrics - improved to an almost neutral offensive player. His shooting metrics are much better & he's turning the ball over less.

Of course, he's almost certainly just ran hot on 3s & he has turned into a spot up shooter only this year (increased 3s from 52% of his shots to 68%).

But yeah, he's still a JAG.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
It's PJ Tucker, not PJ Brown.

And where he's picked, again, does matter. IF HE WAS PICKED SECOND YOU'D EXPECT A MUCH BETTER PLAYER THAN ONE PICKED TWENTY SECOND.

I can do CAPS too.

It's about resources used to acquire that player. If you picked a guy who's a decent bench player at #2, you screwed up. If you picked a guy who's a decent bench player at #22, you're a winner. How can that not matter?

Like, do salaries not matter to you either? If the Celtics sign a guy for 22 million and a guy for 2 million, do you expect the same level of player?
Yeah, if you drafted him 2nd you screwed up. But Grant Williams on court value would be the same today whether he was drafted 2nd or 50th.

Why does it matter that Lonzo Ball went 2nd? Does that make a difference today?

At some point, where a player was drafted stops mattering as far as his value is concerned. I am judging the player, you are judging team building and/or the past. Things you cannot change.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Like, if you drafted a player in the 21st round of the MLB draft and he got 4 career PA, that was a good pick. So?

If he was picked 2nd overall, awful. Doesn't change the quality of player he was.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,829
Yeah, if you drafted him 2nd you screwed up. But Grant Williams on court value would be the same today whether he was drafted 2nd or 50th.

Why does it matter that Lonzo Ball went 2nd? Does that make a difference today?

At some point, where a player was drafted stops mattering as far as his value is concerned. I am judging the player, you are judging team building.
When he was still on his rookie contract? Yes it did.

Now that he's on a second contract, his value is evaluated by how much he's paid. Same as every other player in the league.

You are judging the player with zero context, which is weird.

I can't imagine looking at a player, and evaluating him without considering the resources I used to acquire him.

Like, is it weird I had a higher bar of expectation for Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown, both drafted 3rd, than I do for Grant Williams drafted 22nd?

Seems like common sense.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
When he was still on his rookie contract? Yes it did.

Now that he's on a second contract, his value is evaluated by how much he's paid. Same as every other player in the league.

You are judging the player with zero context, which is weird.

I can't imagine looking at a player, and not evaluating him without considering the resources I used to acquire him.

Like, is it weird I had a higher bar of expectation for Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown, both drafted 3rd, than I do for Grant Williams drafted 22nd?

Seems like common sense.
No, it's not weird. You just aren't getting my argument.

The 3rd pick has high expected value. The 22nd? Considerably less. Who cares if someone is better than the EV of the 22nd pick? That's not exactly a high bar to clear. After some point, the expected return on a pick is slow that Semi Ojeleye is considered a good pick.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,829
No, it's not weird. You just aren't getting my argument.

The 3rd pick has high expected value. The 22nd? Considerably less. Who cares if someone is better than the EV of the 22nd pick? That's not exactly a high bar to clear. After some point, the expected return on a pick is slow that Semi Ojeleye is considered a good pick.
Semi Ojeleye was a good pick. Exactly. Because you spent less on him, your expectation is considerably less because of the resources used. Like, the Semi Ojeleye pick was a scratch ticket I bought for a dollar. There was a .0001% chance it would pay out $1000, and 1% chance it would pay out $100, a 9% chance it would pay out $5, and a near 90% chance it paid out zero. It paid out $5! For me, that's a win. If you want to bemoan it didn't pay out $1000, you're going to go through life always disappointed.

That's how it works. It's not just basketball, or sports, it's life.

Like, some houses cost 5 million. Some cost 500K. If you spend 500K on a house, don't walk around the new homestead pissed off that it doesn't have an indoor pool. That's 5 million dollar house shit. You didn't spend 5 million bucks for your house. Be happy that with the 500K you spent, you have central AC and a garage.

It's the whole point of anything. Did I get a good return on the value I spent.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,559
Don't all the advanced metrics hate Grant Williams?
Raptor thinks he's not good on offense, but a good defender.
DARKO doesn't like him that much (though he's shot up some this year) puts him a -0.4, same as Devonte Graham and Kevin Heurter. Just below Iguodala and Rudy Gay, just better than Jordan Poole, Tyler Herro and Spencer Dinwiddie
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Semi Ojeleye was a good pick. Exactly. Because you spent less on him, your expectation is considerably less because of the resources used. Like, the Semi Ojeleye pick was a scratch ticket I bought for a dollar. There was a .0001% chance it would pay out $1000, and 1% chance it would pay out $100, a 9% chance it would pay out $5, and a near 90% chance it paid out zero. It paid out $5! For me, that's a win. If you want to bemoan it didn't pay out $1000, you're going to go through life always disappointed.

That's how it works. It's not just basketball, or sports, it's life.

Like, some houses cost 5 million. Some cost 500K. If you spend 500K on a house, don't walk around the new homestead pissed off that it doesn't have an indoor pool. That's 5 million dollar house shit. You didn't spend 5 million bucks for your house. Be happy that with the 500K you spent, you have central AC and a garage.

It's the whole point of anything. Did I get a good return on the value I spent.
It paid out $5 and you had to watch 4 years of Semi. Huge win there. Definitely changed the trajectory of the C's too. It was totally a relevant pick.

The pick totally didn't matter. Semi didn't matter. Good pick tho.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,964
Not a contender and not a star, but what about New Orleans and Graham. Griff would sell Smart as a culture setter, lock down defender and perfect fit next to Ingram, Point Zion and stretch Jonas.
People have been getting carried away with the “culture setter” thing for way too long. Do you know why Garnett was a “culture setter”? It’s because he was an MVP level player that had the same streak that all scrappy roleplayers do. If Garnett’s hitting the floor for loose balls and you’re Paul Pierce or Ray Allen, do you do any less?

But scrappy roleplayers are scrappy because that’s their path to being valuable rotation guys. Ingram, Williamson, et al aren’t changing their behavior because the Pelicans have a new scrappy roleplayer. And they’re not giving up serious value for one. Now if you’re the Suns or Jazz Dray Green’s MiniMe has some real value. But they don’t have a lot to give you for it.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,559
It paid out $5 and you had to watch 4 years of Semi. Huge win there. Definitely changed the trajectory of the C's too. It was totally a relevant pick.

The pick totally didn't matter. Semi didn't matter. Good pick tho.
It mattered in the sense that it gave you a low rotation player for cheap, which helped clear cap space for Hayward and then later Kemba. Getting minutes from 2nd rounders is always really good because it makes it easier to get and keep stars with cap rules. Getting value out of your picks and signings is incredibly important in the top heavy world of the NBA, because every $ you save, and every cheap guy with positive value you have to move in trade gets you a step closer to having the 3 or so top level players you need to contend.

People have been getting carried away with the “culture setter” thing for way too long. Do you know why Garnett was a “culture setter”? It’s because he was an MVP level player that had the same streak that all scrappy roleplayers do. If Garnett’s hitting the floor for loose balls and you’re Paul Pierce or Ray Allen, do you do any less?

But scrappy roleplayers are scrappy because that’s their path to being valuable rotation guys. Ingram, Williamson, et al aren’t changing their behavior because the Pelicans have a new scrappy roleplayer. And they’re not giving up serious value for one. Now if you’re the Suns or Jazz Dray Green’s MiniMe has some real value. But they don’t have a lot to give you for it.
The culture setter thing is just nonsense that comes up on this board and from the worse pundits. Nobody trades for Smart for "culture" they trade for Smart because they want one of the league's better defenders, who can also do some other things. He's poor man's Ben Simmons, and priced accordingly.
 

Bernie Carbohydrate

writes the Semi-Fin
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2001
3,363
South Carolina via Dorchestah
It mattered in the sense that it gave you a low rotation player for cheap, which helped clear cap space for Hayward and then later Kemba. Getting minutes from 2nd rounders is always really good because it makes it easier to get and keep stars with cap rules. Getting value out of your picks and signings is incredibly important in the top heavy world of the NBA, because every $ you save, and every cheap guy with positive value you have to move in trade gets you a step closer to having the 3 or so top level players you need to contend.
Cesar, I'm trying to understand where you are coming from and I don't get it.

Yeah, Semi was "irrelevant" in the sense that he was a fungible player. Most second rounders are irrelevant in that way. Paul Reed is irrelevant. Jericho Simms is irrelevant.

But a team has to cover almost 20,000 minutes in an NBA regular season with a 15-man roster and a $136 million salary cap. Semi is on the Bucks now (not in Europe, not on the street), because he can soak up some minutes with okay NBA-level play. Milwaukee thinks Semi is worth $1.7 million this year. Sure, the Celts could have cut Semi and signed someone else to do Semi things, but Semi was on a second round contract (four years, $6.05 million, partially guaranteed) so Semi's theoretical replacement would need to fill 15 minutes per game with replacement-level 3-and-d...for under $1.5 million per year.

I mean, 15 minutes per game of 3-and-d.... Ryan Arcidiacono will give you that--for $3 million per season. Ty Jerome will charge you $2.4 million per year.

An NBA team that can get advantageous production relative to cost from those back end roster spots can pick up an extra win here or there. Maybe that leads to making the playoffs, or a higher seed. Maybe it is irrelevant. For all the talk of the Celtics getting a "third star," there is no way to accumulate difference-makers at the top of the roster unless the team creates some value by covering those thousands of non-star minutes as cheaply as possible. He wasn't a huge win, but he was a good pick.

I can't believe I constructed a whole post about the value of Semi Ojeleye. I cursed him so many, many times.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
8,982
It paid out $5 and you had to watch 4 years of Semi. Huge win there. Definitely changed the trajectory of the C's too. It was totally a relevant pick.

The pick totally didn't matter. Semi didn't matter. Good pick tho.
By this logic almost 100% of picks don't matter, which should tell you it's a pretty flawed logic.
 

Swedgin

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2013
507
People have been getting carried away with the “culture setter” thing for way too long. Do you know why Garnett was a “culture setter”? It’s because he was an MVP level player that had the same streak that all scrappy roleplayers do. If Garnett’s hitting the floor for loose balls and you’re Paul Pierce or Ray Allen, do you do any less?

But scrappy roleplayers are scrappy because that’s their path to being valuable rotation guys. Ingram, Williamson, et al aren’t changing their behavior because the Pelicans have a new scrappy roleplayer. And they’re not giving up serious value for one. Now if you’re the Suns or Jazz Dray Green’s MiniMe has some real value. But they don’t have a lot to give you for it.
I completely agree with the bolded. But I think you are underselling Smart a bit here. He's been all defense guy. And its not just the on court play, the force of personality is a factor.

However, these are minor disagreements, the fundamental disconnect is that you are assuming the Pelicans are a well run franchise making rationale decisions, and I posit Griff wants to a keep his job and a hail mary to acquire a "gritty", "culture setter" may have some appeal to him.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Cesar, I'm trying to understand where you are coming from and I don't get it.

Yeah, Semi was "irrelevant" in the sense that he was a fungible player. Most second rounders are irrelevant in that way. Paul Reed is irrelevant. Jericho Simms is irrelevant.

But a team has to cover almost 20,000 minutes in an NBA regular season with a 15-man roster and a $136 million salary cap. Semi is on the Bucks now (not in Europe, not on the street), because he can soak up some minutes with okay NBA-level play. Milwaukee thinks Semi is worth $1.7 million this year. Sure, the Celts could have cut Semi and signed someone else to do Semi things, but Semi was on a second round contract (four years, $6.05 million, partially guaranteed) so Semi's theoretical replacement would need to fill 15 minutes per game with replacement-level 3-and-d...for under $1.5 million per year.

I mean, 15 minutes per game of 3-and-d.... Ryan Arcidiacono will give you that--for $3 million per season. Ty Jerome will charge you $2.4 million per year.

An NBA team that can get advantageous production relative to cost from those back end roster spots can pick up an extra win here or there. Maybe that leads to making the playoffs, or a higher seed. Maybe it is irrelevant. For all the talk of the Celtics getting a "third star," there is no way to accumulate difference-makers at the top of the roster unless the team creates some value by covering those thousands of non-star minutes as cheaply as possible. He wasn't a huge win, but he was a good pick.

I can't believe I constructed a whole post about the value of Semi Ojeleye. I cursed him so many, many times.
Sure, or maybe wasting a roster spot on Semi cost them Max Strus who would have been just as cheap. You can always find cheap players to fill the back end of your roster and if those players have to play, you are probably in trouble.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
8,982
like 90% of them don't.
Only if your standard is that the guy became an all star or a major part of competing for titles or else he "didn't matter".

By your logic guys like Bradley, Rozier, Olynyk etc didn't matter because the Celtics never made it to the finals and those guys were only good but never great players.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
14,068
Sure, or maybe wasting a roster spot on Semi cost them Max Strus who would have been just as cheap. You can always find cheap players to fill the back end of your roster and if those players have to play, you are probably in trouble.
Semi wasn't a waste of a roster spot. He actually contributed in the roster spot hierarchy that he occupied. Keeping Javonte Green cost Strus the roster spot. And, seriously, Strus isn't exactly a big difference maker anyway.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,809
Only if your standard is that the guy became an all star or a major part of competing for titles or else he "didn't matter".

By your logic guys like Bradley, Rozier, Olynyk etc didn't matter because the Celtics never made it to the finals and those guys were only good but never great players.
That's not my logic you just decided it was because you think Semi mattered. He didn't. He was a shitty player who only played because CBS liked him and because of injuries. Now that he's in Milwaukee, he doesn't play. Replacing him with another shitty player on a cheap contract would have been incredibly easy.

Bradley and Rozier are starting quality players. Clearly the same thing as Semi Ojeleye.